Pros And Cons Of Slavery In The Constitution

When the framers began writing the Constitution, they had to contend with the popular opinion of the delegates. This resulted in heated debates on topics such as slavery. Although not necessarily all, or even a majority, involved in the discussions were in favor of slavery, it had to be ensured that the Constitution would be ratified. The South wanted to count slaves in the population in order to secure more seats in the House of Representatives. The North opposed this movement because it gave more power to the South. After deliberations, the Three-Fifths Compromise was agreed on. Every three out of five slaves counted as a person, this number was chosen because it maintained the balance of power between the North and the South.

When drafting the Constitution, as mentioned before, the founders never specifically mention the institution of slavery in the written document as a means to satisfy and placate the arguments of the Southern states. However, the Constitution did, in fact, safeguard the international slave trade until 1808 ultimately prohibiting any regulations on slavery but it did not impede on future conversations regarding the problem. Due to the fact that the Constitution could not prohibit debate over the issue of slavery, this in turn gave the House of Representatives the ability to lawfully dispute the inquiry following

Slavery is the act of owning a person, making them the legal property of another and forced to obey the defined owner. It was the dominant form of labor in the country of the United States between 1815-1861. This was a country that stood for liberty and freedom, and the way they operated was based off of controlling and forcing others to complete tasks. James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, and Andrew Jackson were President during this time span, and each had different views and morals when it came to slavery. James Madison, the first of the four to run his term, was a key contributor to the Bill of Rights. He believed in human rights especially rights to liberty and property. In an article written to address Madison and other’s views and inputs in the bill, it states “They[George Mason, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson] were men for whom ‘possessing property’ was a natural and an inherited right. And a substantial portion of the property that each owned was slaves”(Roger Wilkins). James Madison wrote in the Bill of Rights each man’s individual liberties and freedoms, and still goes on and with his rights, such as that to own property, he owns other men. James Madison was not someone known to be against slavery, however, he was not a supporter, he merely believed he had the right to property, and with the knowledge that slaves were property he gave himself the right to own slaves.

Slavery. A topic that should never be brought up in a conversation, should never be said casually, and should never happen. Slavery, despite being illegal in every country, is still going on, and at different odds. Slavery has many forms. Many of which, only the cruelest of minds can think up. Slavery is different than in the 1800s because it has many more forms, has more potential slaves, and more profit.

At this time it seemed that the issue of slavery was the only problem in the United States, almost as if a slave was being forced down the throats of the freesoilers (Document F). Stephen Douglas drafted the Kansas-Nebraska Acts in hopes of adding two new states: Kansas and Nebraska. Although it seemed that one would be a slave state, and the other a free state, the slavery issue would be decided by popular sovereignty. Many opposed this decision but did not know how to deal with it. The reason they did not know was because the Constitution did not mention it. William Lloyd Garrison said “the Constitution which subjects them to hopeless bondage is one that we cannot swear to support” (Document E). He was trying to say that the constitution can’t answer the question of slavery because the words “slave” and “slavery” are not in the constitution.

Between 1776 and Constitutional Convention in 1787, ten out of thirteen states banned the importation of slaves from abroad. At the same time, Massachusetts already abolished slavery, Pennsylvania and Connecticut passed legislation for their former slaves. Scholars basically describe the discussion regarding slavery at the Convention as a conflict between “anti-slavery representatives” and “slave state representatives.” In addition, the word “slavery” does not appear on the Constitution because the framers consider it would sully the document. However, slavery received crucial protection in the Constitution. One of the most notorious slavery-related questions was whether slaves would be counted as a part of the population in determining representation in the United States Congress or considered property and thus, have no right to representation. Besides, delegates from states with larger population of slaves claimed that slaves should be considered persons in determining representation. Finally, delegate James Wilson proposed the Three-Fifths Compromise, which was eventually adopted by the convention. The compromise claims "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the

There was no significant desire among most delegates to abolish slavery during the 1787 Constitutional Convention. In addition, the focus of the convention was on forming a more perfect union, not dealing with the issue

The Constitution was open to wide interpretation on many issues including that of slavery. The southerners, who were mainly proponents of slavery, interpreted the Constitution to include slaves as property. They believed that as personal property slaves were allowed to be taken into the Territories of the United States as well as the slave states already existing as part of the Union. Additionally, these Constitutional property rights were interpreted by southerners to mean that “fugitive slaves” should be returned if caught because they are personal property (Document B). The interpretations of the Constitution made by many southern proponents of slavery prove the validity of the statement in question by creating an argument seen as inflammatory by northern opponents of slavery and increasing the tension that sparked the Civil

People went from having ten slaves in a farm to having 500 in a plantation. Slave brutality worsened because of this transition, abolitionist and free-soilers in the north did not like this drastic expansion. They opposed the Mexican War because it was a way for the United States to gain territory, and make them slave states thus increasing the expansion of slavery (Doc.4). Therefore compromises like the Compromise of 1850 were created, this compromise proposed that, “slavery does not exist by law, and it is not likely to be introduced into any territory acquired by the United States from the Republic of Mexico…” (Doc.5). Northerners also started showing opposition to slavery by not adhering to the Fugitive Slave Act. They believed that slavery is, "opposition to the first principles of principles of religion, morals, and humanity." and that its inconsistent with "our aims, as a free, humane, and enlightened people" (Doc.2a). On the other hand southerners believe that "slavery was one of the most dynamic economic and social processes..." and that without slavery "you could not have civilization... slavery freed upper class from manual labor"

The argument between the slave states and the nonslave states was extremely difficult for the framers to handle mainly because the nonslave states view slavery as an immoral practice and the slave states viewed slavery as a necessary practice for their economic interests. But in order to get the constitution to be agreeable for all sides they both had to make compromises, in order to get rid of the Articles of Confederation. The two main practices of compromise the framers used were

This debate created much animosity between the north and south, and put into question the future of slavery. The south wanted to ensure its continuation of it’s a way of life, and the right to own slaves. They wanted to ensure that the new territories of the United States were free to choose for themselves whether or not slavery should be justified in their territory. This

In the years leading up to the Civil War, the compromise of 1850 helped to delay the fight between brothers by having both sides concede important ideals. The compromise of 1850 is logical, because it gave each state a vote in whether or not they could once again get along. This concession allowed for both sides to air out their grievances, and allow for improvement. Both sides were primarily focused on regionalism and cared only for their area and beliefs. One such example is slavery.

In crafting the Constitution, the founders forewent any mention of slavery in order to appease the Southern states. Ultimately, though the Constitution did forbid any new laws concerning slavery until at least 1808, it did not prohibit further discussion of the issue. Therefore, they were legally able to debate the question following the petition.

The debate over slavery was not a primary concern of the conventions, or too complex to tackle at the time. Instead to appease anti-slavers such as Gouverneur Morris the word slave was left out. The issue that should have been more prominent for Northern states was the Three-Fifth Compromise.

Once the Convention heard all the arguments and voted on all the clauses contained about slavery, the delegates concluded that slavery should still be legal. There are a few reasons why they decided this. The first major reason was that the southern economy depended on slavery to operate their plantations. If slavery were abolished, then they would lose their entire work force and would be forced to find white people to work for them instead. This is a major problem, however, since poor white people felt that they were a step up from the African slaves. They didn't want to be doing a job that was normally done by the blacks (It's important to realize that most southern people at that time felt that blacks were an inferior race, and should be treated as such). Many supporters of slavery, such as Charles Pinckney even argued that "In all ages, one-half of mankind